Spin rate is an important golf ball characteristic for both the skilled and unskilled golfer. High spin rates allow for the more skilled golfer, such as PGA professionals and low handicap players, to maximize control of the golf ball. This is particularly beneficial to the more skilled golfer when hitting an approach shot to a green. The ability to intentionally produce "back spin", thereby stopping the ball quickly on the green, and/or "side spin" to draw or fade the ball, substantially improves the golfer's control over the ball. Thus, the more skilled golfer generally prefers a golf ball exhibiting high spin rate properties.
However, a high spin golf ball is not desirous by all golfers, particularly high handicap players who cannot intentionally control the spin of the ball. In this regard, less skilled golfers, have, among others, two substantial obstacles to improving their game: slicing and hooking. When a club head meets a ball, an unintentional side spin is often imparted which sends the ball off its intended course. The side spin reduces one's control over the ball as well as the distance the ball will travel. As a result, unwanted strokes are added to the game.
Consequently, while the more skilled golfer desires a high spin golf ball, a more efficient ball for the less skilled player is a golf ball that exhibits low spin properties. The low spin ball reduces slicing and hooking and enhances roll distance for the amateur golfer.
The present inventors have addressed the need for developing a golf ball having a reduced spin rate after club impact, while at the same time maintaining durability, playability and resiliency characteristics needed for repeated use. The reduced spin rate golf ball of the present invention meets the rules and regulations established by the United States Golf Association (U.S.G.A.).
Along these lines, the U.S.G.A. has set forth five (5) specific regulations that a golf ball must conform to. The U.S.G.A. rules require that a ball be no smaller than 1.680 inches in diameter. However, notwithstanding this restriction, there is no specific limitation as to the maximum permissible diameter of a golf ball. As a result, a golf ball can be as large as desired so long as it is larger than 1.680 inches in diameter and so long as the other four (4) specific regulations are met.
The U.S.G.A. rules also require that balls weigh no more than 1.620 ounces, and that their initial velocity may not exceed 250 feet per second with a maximum tolerance of 2%, or up to 255 ft./sec. Further, the U.S.G.A. rules state that a ball may not travel a distance greater than 280 yards with a test tolerance of 6% when hit by the U.S.G.A. outdoor driving machine under specific conditions.
It has been determined by the present inventors that the combination of a relatively soft core (i.e. Riehle compression of about 75 to 160) and a hard cover (i.e. Shore D hardness of 65 or more) significantly reduces the overall spin rate of the resulting two piece golf ball. The inventors have also learned that an increase in cover thickness, thereby increasing the overall diameter of the resulting molded golf ball, further reduces spin rate.
Top-grade golf balls sold in the United States may be generally classified as one of two types: two-piece or three-piece balls. The two-piece ball, exemplified by the balls sold by Spalding & Evenflo Companies, Inc. (the assignee of the present invention through its wholly owned subsidiary, Lisco, Inc.) under the trademark TOP-FLITE, consists of a solid polymeric core and a separately formed outer cover. The so-called three-piece balls, exemplified by the balls sold under the trademark TITLEIST by the Acushnet Company, consist of a liquid (e.g., TITLEIST TOUR 384) or solid (e.g., TITLEIST DT) center, elastomeric thread windings about the center, and a cover.
Spalding's two-piece golf balls are produced by molding a natural (balata) or synthetic (i.e. thermoplastic resin such as an ionomer resin) polymeric cover composition around a preformed polybutadiene (rubber) core. During the molding process, the desired dimple pattern is molded into the cover material. In order to reduce the number of coating steps involved in the finishing of the golf balls, a color pigment or dye and, in many instances, an optical brightener, are added directly to the generally "off white" colored polymeric cover composition prior to molding. By incorporating the pigment and/or optical brightener in the cover composition molded onto the golf ball core, this process eliminates the need for a supplemental pigmented painting step in order to produce a white or colored (notably orange, pink and yellow) golf ball.
With respect to multi-layered golf balls, Spalding is the leading manufacturer of two-piece golf balls in the world. Spalding manufactures over sixty (60) different types of two-piece balls which vary distinctly in such properties as playability (i.e. spin rate, compression, feel, etc.), travel distance (initial velocity, C.O.R., etc.), durability (impact, cut and weather resistance) and appearance (i.e. whiteness, reflectance, yellowness, etc.) depending upon the ball's core, cover and coating materials, as well as the ball's surface configuration (i.e. dimple pattern). Consequently, Spalding's two-piece golf balls offer both the amateur and professional golfer a variety of performance characteristics to suit an individual's game.
In regard to the specific components of a golf ball, although the nature of the cover can, in certain instances, make a significant contribution to the overall feel, spin (control), coefficient of restitution (C.O.R.) and initial velocity of a ball (see, for example, U.S. Pat. No. 3,819,768 to Molitor), the initial velocity of two-piece and three-piece balls is determined mainly by the coefficient of restitution of the core. The coefficient of restitution of the core of wound (i.e. three-piece) balls can be controlled within limits by regulating the winding tension and the thread and center composition. With respect to two-piece balls, the coefficient of restitution of the core is a function of the properties of the elastomer composition from which it is made.
The cover component of a golf ball is particularly influential in effecting the compression (feel), spin rates (control), distance (C.O.R.), and durability (i.e. impact resistance, etc.) of the resulting ball. Various cover compositions have been developed by Spalding and others in order to optimize the desired properties of the resulting golf balls.
Over the last twenty (20) years, improvements in cover and core material formulations and changes in dimple patterns have more or less continually improved golf ball distance. Top-grade golf balls, however, must meet several other important design criteria. To successfully compete in today's golf ball market, a golf ball should be resistant to cutting and must be finished well; it should hold a line in putting and should have good click and feel. In addition, the ball should exhibit spin and control properties dictated by the skill and experience of the end user.
Prior artisans have attempted to incorporate metal layers or metal filler particles in golf balls to alter the physical characteristics and performance of the balls. For example, U.S. Pat. No. 3,031,194 to Strayer is directed to the use of a spherical inner metal layer that is bonded or otherwise adhered to a resilient inner constituent within the ball. The ball utilizes a liquid filled core. U.S. Pat. No. 4,863,167 to Matsuki, et al. describes golf balls containing a gravity filler which may be formed from one or more metals disposed within a solid rubber-based core. U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,886,275 and 4,995,613, both to Walker, disclose golf balls having a dense metal-containing core. U.S. Pat. No. 4,943,055 to Corley is directed to a weighted warmup ball having a metal center.
Prior artisans have also described golf balls having one or more interior layers formed from a metal, and which feature a hollow center. Davis disclosed a golf ball comprising a spherical steel shell having a hollow air-filled center in U.S. Pat. No. 697,816. Kempshall received numerous patents directed to golf balls having metal inner layers and hollow interiors, such as U.S. Pat. Nos. 704,748; 704,838; 713,772; and 739,753. In U.S. Pat. Nos. 1,182,604 and 1,182,605, Wadsworth described golf balls utilizing concentric spherical shells formed from tempered steel. U.S. Pat. No. 1,568,514 to Lewis describes several embodiments for a golf ball, one of which utilizes multiple steel shells disposed within the ball, and which provide a hollow center for the ball.
Prior artisans have attempted to provide golf balls having liquid filled centers. Toland described a golf ball having a liquid core in U.S. Pat. No. 4,805,914. Toland describes improved performance by removing dissolved gases present in the liquid to decrease the degree of compressibility of the liquid core. U.S. Pat. No. 5,037,104 to Watanabe, et al. and U.S. Pat. No. 5,194,191 to Nomura, et al. disclose thread wound golf balls having liquid cores. Similarly, U.S. Pat. No. 5,421,580 to Sugimoto, et al. and U.S. Pat. No. 5,511,791 to Ebisuno, et al. are both directed to thread wound golf balls having liquid cores limited to a particular range of viscosities or diameters. Moreover, Molitor, et al. described golf balls with liquid centers in U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,150,906 and 5,480,155.
Two U.S. patents disclosing a golf ball having a metal mantle layer in combination with a liquid core are U.S. Pat. No. 3,031,194 to Strayer and the previously noted U.S. Pat. No. 1,568,514 to Lewis. Unfortunately, the ball constructions and design teachings disclosed in these patents involve a large number of layers of different materials, relatively complicated or intricate manufacturing requirements, and/or utilize materials that have long been considered unacceptable for the present golf ball market.
Concerning attempts to provide golf balls with cellular or foamed polymeric materials utilized as a core, few approaches have been proposed. U.S. Pat. No. 4,839,116 to Puckett, et al. discloses a short distance golf ball. It is believed that artisans considered the use of foam or a cellular material undesirable in a golf ball, perhaps from a believed loss or decrease in the coefficient of restitution of a ball utilizing a cellular core.
Although satisfactory in at least some respects, all of the foregoing ball constructions, particularly the few utilizing a metal shell and a liquid core, are deficient. This is most evident when considered in view of the stringent demands of the current golf industry. Moreover, the few disclosures of a golf ball comprising a cellular or foam material do not motivate one to employ a cellular material in a regulation golf ball. Specifically, there is a need for a golf ball that exhibits a high initial velocity or coefficient of restitution (COR), may be driven relatively long distances in regulation play, and which may be readily and inexpensively manufactured.
In an alternative embodiment, the spin rate of the ball is further reduced by increasing the thickness of the cover and/or decreasing the weight and softness of the core. By increasing the cover thickness and/or the overall diameter of the resulting molded golf ball, enhanced reduction in spin rate is observed.
With respect to the increased size of the ball, over the years golf ball manufacturers have generally produced golf balls at or around the minimum size and maximum weight specifications set forth by the U.S.G.A. There have, however, been exceptions, particularly in connection with the manufacture of golf balls for teaching aids. For example, oversized, overweight (and thus unauthorized) golf balls have been on sale for use as golf teaching aids (see U.S. Pat. No. 3,201,384 to Barber).
Oversized golf balls are also disclosed in New Zealand Patent 192,618 dated Jan. 1, 1980, issued to a predecessor of the present assignee. This patent teaches an oversize golf ball having a diameter between 1.700 and 1.730 inches and an oversized core of resilient material (i.e. about 1.585 to 1.595 inches in diameter) so as to increase the coefficient of restitution. Additionally, the patent discloses that the ball should include a cover having a thickness less than the cover thickness of conventional balls (i.e. a cover thickness of about 0.050 inches as opposed to 0.090 inches for conventional two-piece balls).
In addition, it is also noted that golf balls made by Spalding in 1915 were of a diameter ranging from 1.630 inches to 1.710 inches. As the diameter of the ball increased, the weight of the ball also increased. These balls were comprised of covers made up of balata/gutta percha and cores made from solid rubber or liquid sacs and wound with elastic thread.
Golf balls known as the LYNX JUMBO were also commercially available by Lynx in October, 1979. These balls had a diameter of 1.76 to 1.80 inches. These balls met with little or no commercial success. The LYNX JUMBO balls consisted of a core comprised of wound core and a cover comprised of natural or synthetic balata.
However, notwithstanding the enhanced diameters of these golf balls, none of these balls produced the enhanced spin reduction characteristics and overall playability, distance and durability properties of the present invention and/or fall within the regulations set forth by the U.S.G.A. An object of the present invention is to produce a U.S.G.A. regulation golf ball having improved low spin properties while maintaining the resilience and durability characteristics necessary for repetitive play.
These and other objects and features of the invention will be apparent from the following summary and description of the invention and from the claims.